Employment Law/The difference between employees and independent contractors | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
< Employment Law
What is the difference between an employee and an independent contractor, and why does it matter?In employment law, the determination of employee or contractor status determines which laws protect and govern the worker in question. Therefore, this determination of status is crucial. If a person is an employee, s/he:
If a person is a contractor, s/he:
I have a person doing some work for me, but I do not want him to be considered an employee. I signed a contract that says he is an independent contractor. Doesn’t that mean that he is?No. Written contracts are useful as a guide in determining whether you have an employer/employee or payer/contractor relationship. However, the essence of the relationship is the determining factor, regardless of what appears in the contract. Just because a person is labeled an independent contractor does not mean that s/he is one. In order to be an independent contractor, the person must meet the criteria that have been developed at common law. How can I know if I am (or my worker is) an employee or an independent contractor? What are the common law tests?Common law tests developed by the courts and various tribunals determine who is an employee and who is an independent contractor. In general, the tests look at these five factors:
None of these factors is determinative on its own. You need to look at the whole picture. What is considered when looking at the issue of control?The control test addresses the payer's authority to exercise control over the work that will be done and the way it will be done. Even if such control is never exercised, the fact that control exists is strong evidence of an employer/employee relationship. A payer might be entitled to stipulate what an independent contractor will do or what result is to be achieved, but not how the work will be completed. When examining this issue, a court, tribunal or government body will consider matters such as the following:
Again, no single factor is determinative, but the greater the degree of control, the greater the likelihood that the person is an employee. What is considered when looking at the issue of ownership of tools?The ownership of toolstest has a broad application. The word tools can be interpreted to mean, for example, space, supplies, materials, furnishings, phones, computers, and equipment. In general, a worker is more likely to be in an employment relationship if s/he uses tools, space, supplies, materials, furnishings, and equipment owned by the payer. If, on the other hand, the worker owns or rents the tools, materials, and facilities s/he uses to perform services, s/he is more likely to be an independent contractor. Other aspects of this issue include who bears the cost of replacing the tools and who retains the tools when the work is complete. Some employees such as mechanics customarily use their own hand tools. The courts have recognized that some employers require employees to provide their own tools and/or vehicles. What is considered when looking at the issue of chance of profit/risk of loss?The chance of profit/risk of loss test addresses whether the worker is earning a fixed wage or salary or ongoing commission. Or is the worker in business to make a profit and therefore at risk of losing money? When a court, tribunal, or government agency is considering this issue, they may ask questions such as these:
What is considered when looking at the issue of integration?The integration test addresses whether the work being done is really integral to the payer's business. Is it part of the everyday work, or can it be considered separate? In an employment relationship, a worker is employed as part of the business and is integral to the business. Under a contract, however, an individual's work, although it may be done for the business, is really ancillary. Therefore, integration has to be considered from the point of view of the worker, not the payer.
What is considered when looking at the issue of payment?The payment test considers the financial details of the relationship between the worker and the payer. Certain factors are generally considered strong evidence of an employer/employee relationship. For example:
Who exactly conducts the common law tests, and when?The common law tests may be needed at various stages of the employment or business relationship. For example, the following programs or agencies may consider worker/payer relationships:
Are there any exceptions or special situations?Yes. Special rules concerning the Canada Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, and income tax apply to workers engaged in certain occupations These occupations include:
For more information, visit the external resources. How can I confirm the nature of the relationship before it becomes a problem?Either party can request an "advance ruling" from the Canada Revenue Agency. An advance ruling can provide much certainty about the status of the relationship being entered into. However, this process can take quite a bit of time. To request an advance ruling, use Form CPT1, Request for a Ruling as the Status of a Worker under the Canada Pension Plan and/or the Employment Insurance Act, available at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/cpt1/README.html or by calling 1.800.959.2221. What are the risks of using the wrong label?If a payer treats a worker as an independent contractor and some legal forum determines otherwise, the financial liability could be enormous.
If a worker believes s/he is a contractor and finds out later that s/he was an employee, the worker may have to resubmit applicable income tax returns and may owe monies, including penalties. For example, the worker may have deducted numerous expenses that an employee is not permitted to deduct. Note: An agreement that labels a worker as either an employee or an independent contractor is not binding on the government or any other legal forum. The tests discussed earlier provide some guidance but these issues are often not clear-cut. Will I be subject to any penalties if I get this wrong?Yes. If the payer is audited and the Canada Revenue Agency rules that "contract workers" are actually employees, the payer will be responsible for, at minimum:
The employee will be responsible for, at minimum, personal back taxes, if unpaid. More InformationFor more information, please see our External Resources See Also
This page was last updated in May, 2008. Back Content last reviewed 16:37, 21 July 2009.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
These FAQs cover the law at the time these questions were prepared. Every effort has been taken to ensure the accuracy of these FAQs. However, laws change and every situation is different, so do not take action using this information without consulting a lawyer. |